https://www.idsnews.com/article/201...in-ncaa-tournament-with-3-0-win-over-kentucky
Dominates. Good look that.
Dominates. Good look that.
OT - IU Men's Soccer dominates kY to move into Round of 16
- Thread starter rikki-tikka-tava
- Start date
IU has a pretty favorable draw/bracket with unseeded ucsb. win the next one and likely get wake away
On IU soccer I'll generally tape the game and fast forward through until someone scores. That way you can watch an entire soccer game in 5 minutes.
But I did watch this one live, and those 3 goals were all interesting amazing plays. The kid had a day, for sure.
The last shot, in particular, was very nice. Hay Hat trick for a freshman, I hope he sticks around for a few years.
I have two relatives who have played for IU, including one who was the goalkeeper on a NC team.
I've seen my fair share of IU soccer games, including the brutally cold and boring NC game at Columbus, Ohio. I've sat through 2-3 dreadful 0-0 double OT ties.
I could fix soccer if they'd let me do it. They won't let me do it. I will never like the game as it is..
That said, I'll always watch IU in the tourney. It's great having IU as the #1 historical program, whatever the sport.
Most impressive about this IU team is they lost 10 of 11 starters from last year's team that went to the College Cup (Final 4): 7 seniors and 3 early entries to MLS. A combination of last year's reserves and a stellar freshman class has formed a great new lineup. Very few soccer programs could pull that off.
Indeed. I was surprised when they started the year ranked #2 in the country considering all they lost. They weren't quite good enough to maintain that ranking but definitely a top 10 team with the #5 seed in the tournament after winning the B1G again. Very impressive even considering it was a very good incoming class (#2).
For sure. even many historical programs like ucla and slu have failed to maintain success. what iu has accomplished is truly incredible. it has also benefited greatly from location. historically soccer tournament's are regional. the competition coming from the midwest has never compared to that of the south so for iu to get to at least a sweet 16 or elite 8 is far easier than teams coming from the south where soccer is so much bigger. the number of divison 1 programs in the carolinas alone is incredible and by the second round you are usually playing the winner of the ACC - far and away the best conference in the country year in and year out. IU's path for success is very favorable. iu's ability to finish the job once there is what's truly amazing to me though.
The UK game was the first IU game I've seen this year.
My impression was that they have a lot of skilled forwards and midfielders, but they don't seem to have the lock-down stud defender and goalkeeper of some past teams.....I've seen some other IU teams were almost impossible to score against.....is that a fair observation?
That said, they might win anyway.....that tourney seems very random.
Now that would definitely be interesting. Unfortunately soccer is such a low budget sport I doubt it would fly.
The defense has gotten better as the season progressed. Todd made a gutsy decision benching his 5th year Senior GK for a true freshman mid-season. It worked out, as Celetano is pretty tough back there. Jack Maher anchors the defense.
College soccer is funny-the best team often doesn't win it all. Last year, Maryland was pretty mediocre all year and just got hot and steamrolled through the College Cup as an 11 seed. IU won it all as a 16 seed in 2012. I'd say the tournament is wide open right now.
College soccer is funny-the best team often doesn't win it all. Last year, Maryland was pretty mediocre all year and just got hot and steamrolled through the College Cup as an 11 seed. IU won it all as a 16 seed in 2012. I'd say the tournament is wide open right now.
I was a ball boy for the 82 and 83 national championship teams. Great memories of being able to watch the game and hear the players from field level. Didn’t respect or appreciate it as much then as I do now.
--Americanize it by increasing the goal size to have 3-2, 4-3 games instead of 2 OT 0-0 ties.
--Get rid of ties. Penalty kick after after an 8 minute OT
--Make two different distances for penalty kicks....the present one being reserved for the more serious situations where the penalty almost certainly prevented a goal
--Allow more frequent substitution. Why have 25 players standing around with no prospect of playing
--Use the longer penalty kick distance for the tie-breaking OT PKs. Make it harder for the kicker, and give the goalkeeper a real shot instead of just guessing and diving hellbent for one side or the other
--In general, pay less heed to the World Cup and give more attention to the Americanized version of the game. We never come close to winning the WC anyway (the men).
How about getting rid of offsides? Color me naive because I'm far from a soccer aficionado (game being what it is, hard for me even watching IU play), but I never understood the rationale. Seen any number of exciting downfield breakaways undone by the matter of a few feet/meters, and since watching Teams battle for 90 minutes+ with little or no scoring just basically sucks, seems that opening up the field/scoring would help immensely.
Offside is in place to force a team to move the ball up the field dribbling or passing, without it offensive players would cherry pick in front of the goal and players would just “boot it” down the field. Defeats how the game is intended to play.
The beauty of soccer is control, possession of the ball, speed, individual foot skills, passing and receiving. I agree that the low scoring is deterrent to many potential fans.
I think if announcers used more stats like possession %, completed passes, passes intercepted, deflections (jk) number of players beat 1 on 1, mph of a player making a run, number of 50/50 balls won and other interesting stats would get more fans to understand the positive plays that occur in a game that help produce a goal.
Stats are common in all popular sports, but soccer games on tv rarely give any stats outside of corners, shots on goal and possession percentage.
Good post re possession etc. some people appreciate the nuances of the game or they don't. the suggestions in the one post above suggesting "americanizing it" just hurt my head. the simpson's had a great episode on soccer that it reminded me of.
finally re offsides you are spot on. i still play in an old man's league (a few leftovers from that 82/83 IU team you talked about are on it) and we don't have offsides. there's constant cherry picking and the game just gets spread to the point of absurdity. in part because we're old. but cherry picking doesn't help lol. 10 guys in one box 10 guys in the other box and 80 yards of green grass between!
First post here in over three years and it's to whine. Brilliant.
It clearly says OT (off topic) - allow us our revels, not like IU makes a national tourney every day.
Not whining at all. Just a simple question, which you chose not to answer.
He answered it pretty clearly if you are capable of reading. Try waiting another 3 years before your next post or quit whining.
So other than you being a snobby condescending 'purist', what are your specific objections? Keep in mind in answering that I do understand the necessity for the offsides rule.
I don't think you can separate the two. I am a snobby, condescending soccer purist. I wouldn't change anything other than aggressively dealing with diving. I actually don't hate your suggestion to allow for more substitutions.
The remainder i'm not for - it's the number one sport in the world for a reason. we don't need to "americanize" anything. as we get better coaches we'll get better in time. that said, we again don't need to change a thing. soccer has never been more popular in the US than it is right now. atlanta united outdraws both football and baseball in atlanta - to cite one example. and there are more.
as for more pks and greater distances for pks etc i'm not a fan. i hate pks to begin with. i'd be more inclined to eliminate pks at the end of a game and make the players play until they score. perhaps allow for more substitutions in extra time.
the goal is the perfect size.
That's exactly what I thought you'd say. No specific reasons, just can't mess with 'the beautiful game'.
Hey, news flash. It's just another game. And a boring ass game to watch at that, although I get that it's an active game to play.
Imagine college basketball if everyone had decided that the game in 1970 was perfect.
Give me soccer ruffians over soccer snobs any day.
It is the offside rule, a player cannot be offside multiple times on the same play. Parents of an 8 year old in a rec league that does not understand the game call it offsides and want a bigger goal. Just another way to tell snobby soccer purists from everyone else.
finally re offsides you are spot on. i still play in an old man's league (a few leftovers from that 82/83 IU team you talked about are on it) and we don't have offsides. there's constant cherry picking and the game just gets spread to the point of absurdity. in part because we're old. but cherry picking doesn't help lol. 10 guys in one box 10 guys in the other box and 80 yards of green grass between![/QUOTE]
McMurtry-where is that league? Somewhere in Indy? I've been looking for a place to play for older guys. I'm still in my 40s, but way too out of shape to bang with guys half my age in the men's league. Thanks.
McMurtry-where is that league? Somewhere in Indy? I've been looking for a place to play for older guys. I'm still in my 40s, but way too out of shape to bang with guys half my age in the men's league. Thanks.
Mushroom's idea of making the goal bigger is not a bad idea except that it would make the game more difficult for Americans in international play.
However, a goal that is 10ft high and 1ft wider would increase scoring and draw more high level athletes into the game.
If you can convince FIFA to make that a universal rule, I'm in.
Americans want to see more scoring as a general rule Ive heard over the years. 3-2 or 4-3 games are highly entertaining but 0-0 ties in freezing rain are often not so much.
IU likes to attack and is one of the more fun teams to watch.
So the only things slowing down the draw are low scoring and not enough big world class athletes vs football/basketball.
However, a goal that is 10ft high and 1ft wider would increase scoring and draw more high level athletes into the game.
If you can convince FIFA to make that a universal rule, I'm in.
Americans want to see more scoring as a general rule Ive heard over the years. 3-2 or 4-3 games are highly entertaining but 0-0 ties in freezing rain are often not so much.
IU likes to attack and is one of the more fun teams to watch.
So the only things slowing down the draw are low scoring and not enough big world class athletes vs football/basketball.
That's a reach. No, I take that back - it's simply not true unless your notion of popular comprises near-total obscurity
McMurtry-where is that league? Somewhere in Indy? I've been looking for a place to play for older guys. I'm still in my 40s, but way too out of shape to bang with guys half my age in the men's league. Thanks.[/QUOTE]
GeddyHoosier you would be more than welcome. Unfortunately it's a bit of a drive. St. Louis. i know the feeling playing guys half your age all too well. our team is loaded, we even have two former world cup players who play tournaments with us, but anytime we play guys half our age we get destroyed. we do great with the ball, but then inevitably give up a handful of counterattacks that we're to slow to get our fat arses back for and lose. it's no fun playing young guys. the other benefit of over 40 is there's far less hacking. more gentleman agreements that we all have to work the next day lol. i thought bloomington used to have a senior league? at least over 30?
Similar threads
